It depends on how the curriculum is structured. If each week builds explicitly on the previous week that’s certainly true, but there are other ways of doing it. The GB curriculum is more geared toward making sure that by the time you hit blue belt you’ll have seen all the basic positions and have some options from each of them; so the plan is there not to have each class build on the previous one, but to ensure that all bases are covered. We have beginners at every week of the cycle and no problems; each class is accessible without the previous one. The safe assumption (for instructors) is not “the students in class 11 have taken all of classes 1–10”, but “the students in intermediate classes have pretty much done all the fundamentals classes a couple of times and know all basic positions and techniques”.

Yes, and this is why I cringe when people try to take school education and mix it with Martial Arts. I seriously think that is what led to the McDojo explosion.

In MA you should be constantly refining the basics every week, day and every month. So, you may miss a day, but you never truly fall behind because those techniques are constantly repeated. What I have noticed is that the more "alive" a school the less structured it is like the OP has mentioned.

It depends on how the curriculum is structured. If each week builds explicitly on the previous week that’s certainly true, but there are other ways of doing it. The GB curriculum is more geared toward making sure that by the time you hit blue belt you’ll have seen all the basic positions and have some options from each of them; so the plan is there not to have each class build on the previous one, but to ensure that all bases are covered. We have beginners at every week of the cycle and no problems; each class is accessible without the previous one. The safe assumption (for instructors) is not “the students in class 11 have taken all of classes 1–10”, but “the students in intermediate classes have pretty much done all the fundamentals classes a couple of times and know all basic positions and techniques”.

Thanks. That is kind of what I had in mind. I have seen grappling schools where guys were working mount escapes and whatnot and can't yet properly bridge or shrimp. Seems counterproductive. I had similar issues at the first bjj school I went to. I left there because it all seemed like a big mess and turned me off of grappling for awhile. I felt like the newbs at the school were just grappling dummies for the more experienced guys to exploit. If they had a proper curriculum I would have stayed.

Thanks. That is kind of what I had in mind. I have seen grappling schools where guys were working mount escapes and whatnot and can't yet properly bridge or shrimp. Seems counterproductive. I had similar issues at the first bjj school I went to. I left there because it all seemed like a big mess and turned me off of grappling for awhile. I felt like the newbs at the school were just grappling dummies for the more experienced guys to exploit. If they had a proper curriculum I would have stayed.

To some extent, I think this will always happen. A good curriculum where things are broken down into levels and every officially-Intermediate student has had opportunity to work all the basics should minimise it, but let’s face it: Everyone has to start somewhere, everyone is going to suck at bridging/bumping an opponent off the first few times they do it.

It sounds to me like your first club had a cultural problem first and foremost. I suppose I could treat the absolute beginners as mere grappling dummies, but what would the point of that be? I’ve risen somewhat above my original suckage thanks to people, instructors and more senior students, who encouraged and helped me, pointed out my mistakes that they exploited, taught me the proper escapes. (During and in between the beatings, of course.) I wouldn’t want to do any less for the people coming in the door now. We’re supposed to be a club and a team, right?